The large-scale massive open online course (xMOOC) rose to prominence in 2012–13 on the promise that its outcomes would be better and cheaper than those of face-to-face university instruction. By late 2013, xMOOC educational claims had been largely discredited, though policy interest in ed-tech carried on. What can we learn about the future of ed-tech by analysing this eighteen-month period in higher education history? This article gathers different types of evidence to suggest several conclusions: MOOC momentum was propelled by an administrative failure to apply due diligence to xMOOC educational claims. The MOOC path was also smoothed by a confusion among key commentators between xMOOCs and small-scale ‘connectivity’ MOOCs that did show meaningful learning outcomes. At the same time, online courses do not overcome race-based disparities of outcome and in some cases make them worse. In addition, student use of online courses appears to be instrumental, even cynical, further limiting their educational value. MOOCs will be back in modified form to endanger educational equity and quality unless faculty members articulate explicit goals and standards for public higher education to which ed-tech can be held accountable.

中文翻译：

---

MOOC 战争的后果：商业供应商能否支持创造性高等教育？

大规模大规模开放在线课程 (xMOOC) 在 2012-13 年声名鹊起，因为它承诺其结果将比面对面的大学教学更好、更便宜。到 2013 年底，尽管对教育技术的政策兴趣仍在继续，但 xMOOC 的教育主张在很大程度上已不可信。通过分析这 18 个月的高等教育历史，我们可以了解教育技术的未来？本文收集了不同类型的证据以提出以下几个结论： MOOC 势头是由行政上未能对 xMOOC 教育声明进行尽职调查所推动的。由于 xMOOC 和确实显示出有意义的学习成果的小规模“连接性”MOOC 之间的主要评论员之间的混淆，MOOC 路径也变得平滑。同时，在线课程不能克服基于种族的结果差异，并且在某些情况下会使它们变得更糟。此外，学生对在线课程的使用似乎是有用的，甚至是愤世嫉俗的，进一步限制了他们的教育价值。MOOC 将以修改后的形式恢复，以危及教育公平和质量，除非教职员工明确说明公共高等教育的目标和标准，教育技术可以对其负责。